Austrian Theorizing: Recalling the Foundations

Volume 2, No. 4 (Winter 1999)

We have tried to take Caplan to task for his many errors of omission and commission. Nevertheless, we think his was a very worthwhile article. Why? First, its quality. As a critique of Austrianism it far surpasses many of the others cited above, and is easily in the class of Nozick (1977), which we certainly mean as high praise. Second, it is important for the profession as a whole to at least be aware of the praxeological tradition, and the publication of an article critical of it in as prestigious a periodical as the Southern Economic Journal cannot but help in this regard. It is no exaggeration to state that the typical member of the economics profession is far more aware of another heterodox view, Marxism, than he is of Austrianism. And yet, surely even Caplan would agree, the latter has far more to offer the practitioner of economics than the former.